Close.  Displacement currents do not create heat, only conduction currents.

Some mechanisms to alter the magnetic cross-sectional area in real time.  Unfortunately they an not air core solutions.

I seriously think Newman was doing this with his other set of windings.

Thinking delay-line and altering the reflected phase angle ever so slightly of the standing wave is going to be very tricky.  You will have to find that sweet-spot before you can even attempt making any tiny adjustments to push the wave forward or aft.

Quote from Matt Watts on March 21st, 2018, 08:44 PM

Close.  Displacement currents do not create heat, only conduction currents.

You'll note that your statement only applies to a perfect dielectric, which does not exist in the real world.

Dielectrics store energy in the D field by sloshing electrons around at least a little bit. Some also flip atoms between different energy states. Any time you move energy around, even at the scale of a few atoms, there is the opportunity to lose some of it as heat.

In fact, it's a mathematical certainty... remember, all interactions must lose to heat at least ¹/c² of the energy transferred.

So yet again, quantum mechanics exposes a flaw in conventional theory.

Work with me here Cycle.  We need to understand something very much overlooked about a resistor and resistance in general.

When Russ has too low of resistance with his batteries, the batteries themselves lock the rotor from turning at the rate it is capable of.  This is a resistance inside of the batteries, in respect of the coil resistance.  Now if we could make that internal battery resistance go sky-high for a short moment in time, the rotor would fly right out of the coil.  What are we missing?

My take on it is here:

Quote from Cycle on March 21st, 2018, 07:36 PM

So essentially a low-resistance battery would 'outrun' the rotational rate of the rotor, allowing the battery to continue pumping voltage into the coil and accelerating the rotor, whereas a high-resistance battery has a voltage dip which allows the induced momentum of the rotor (after the first 15 - 20 degrees of rotation) to induce current in the same direction as the applied current.

Quote from Matt Watts on March 21st, 2018, 08:08 PM

Resistance is the key to this device, or should I say impedance.



Is kicking our ass.  We need to flip things around so that as resistance goes down, voltage AND current goes up.  We need conductance, not resistance.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sierpinski_triangle#/media/File:Animated_construction_of_Sierpinski_Triangle.gif



P = I 2 ⋅ R

O 1 2 4 8 16 32 64

Magic sQuar 2O18
...https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6fedjvyRt5w
...https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7QvxuG3llhY

For the Cantor set described earlier, tau = 1/3 and therefore the dimension = log 2 / log 3 = 0.6309...



http://paulbourke.net/fractals/gasket/

believe...whatever you want to believe.....you stay in wonderland

http://open-source-energy.org/?topic=1637.msg27115#msg27115

Quote from Cycle on March 21st, 2018, 09:19 PM

In fact, it's a mathematical certainty... remember, all interactions must lose to heat at least ¹/c² of the energy transferred.

Id say this is not true, why? Because when you add an inductor between a cap to cap transfer... you can transfer all most all of this energy. ( i proved this on my bench, see video )

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iw1FSr6xWek

so there for it all depends on the system. if your going from dielectric from magnetic back to dielectric you can do a much better job at transferring the energy.

check out this chart.

~Russ

Quote from ~Russ on March 22nd, 2018, 09:43 AM

so there for it all depends on the system. if your going from dielectric from magnetic back to dielectric you can do a much better job at transferring the energy.

L.M.D. to T.E.M. converter circuit.

Speed-of-light waves converted to slower conventional AC/DC polar/non-polar waves for *load* circuits.

Quote from namirha on March 22nd, 2018, 02:35 AM

Magic sQuar 2O18
...

believe...whatever you want to believe.....you stay in wonderland

It would seem you are correct.

Quote from namirha on March 22nd, 2018, 02:35 AM

Magic sQuar 2O18
...

believe...whatever you want to believe.....you stay in wonderland

2018

Red pill.

There goes all the lies! (And everyone affected: Hillary for Prison)

:happynewyear:

Quote from Matt Watts on March 21st, 2018, 09:26 PM

Work with me here Cycle.  We need to understand something very much overlooked about a resistor and resistance in general.

When Russ has too low of resistance with his batteries, the batteries themselves lock the rotor from turning at the rate it is capable of.  This is a resistance inside of the batteries, in respect of the coil resistance.  Now if we could make that internal battery resistance go sky-high for a short moment in time, the rotor would fly right out of the coil.  What are we missing?


How are you checking resistance on a battery. On a typical multi meter it has its own battery that it uses for a reference, so depending on how much charge the batteries have that you are checking it would seem the resistance readings would not be accurate or vary quite  a bit..

Using this methiod. 

https://learn.sparkfun.com/tutorials/measuring-internal-resistance-of-batteries

Using the voltage drop,  current, and Resistance of the coil.

~Russ

Quote from ~Russ on March 22nd, 2018, 09:43 AM

Id say this is not true

That all energy transfers lose 1/c² of the energy released or transferred is a fundamental truth, empirically proven. That's where the EMP comes from in a conventional-explosive Flux Compression Generator bomb. Without that fundamental truth, FCGs wouldn't work.

In fact, if you look at some of the video recordings of the WTC towers (especially those which are situated close to the towers at the time of impact), right at the moment the plane hits the tower, the camera has 'snow'... the explosion of the fuel onboard the plane created an EMP due to that 1/c² reality which interfered with the cameras. Conspiracy theorists used this fact to claim that "particle beam" weapons or nukes buried under the towers were used to bring down the towers. :roll:

That's not to say you can't more than make up for that energy loss in creative ways (such as using a diode, a switch, an inductor and a ground connection to create an upstream 'vacuum' to pull more current than that which was transferred).

Quote from Cycle on March 22nd, 2018, 08:12 PM

That's not to say you can't more than make up for that energy loss in creative ways (such as using a diode, a switch, an inductor and a ground connection to create an upstream 'vacuum' to pull more current than that which was transferred).

I like where ur going...

I'm confused. 

Your saying that ALL energy transfers lose 1/c2 of the energy released or transferred.

Even in super conductors? 

The word ALL implies. Every.  I don't think thats a corect statement.  Can you please point me to some readding on this so I can understand? 

Thanks! 
~Russ

Quote from ~Russ on March 22nd, 2018, 10:25 PM

Your saying that ALL energy transfers lose 1/c2 of the energy released or transferred.

All of them except energy transfers that leave the source in a negative polarity.    :-P

Quote from ~Russ on March 22nd, 2018, 10:25 PM

I'm confused. 

Your saying that ALL energy transfers lose 1/c2 of the energy released or transferred.

Even in super conductors? 

The word ALL implies. Every.  I don't think thats a corect statement.  Can you please point me to some readding on this so I can understand? 

Thanks! 
~Russ

I assume you're referring to a superconductor loop. Just as an unperturbed permanent magnet doesn't lose any energy, so too for an unperturbed superconductor... it's not transferring any energy anywhere unless interacted with in some way. It's merely a frictionless flywheel, to put it to a mechanical analogy.

But try to draw any energy from or put any energy into that 'flywheel', and the rule holds for the amount of energy put in or taken out.

The advantage of permanent magnets over superconductors is that the magnetism is "locked in" by the magnetic hardness of the crystalline structure of the magnet's material... so we can draw some energy out of a permanent magnet and it'll regain its electron's usual orbital radius by drawing energy from the quantum vacuum (as I've discussed several times prior, the vacuum polarization around the nucleus of each atom causes a geometric transform of the scalar quantum vacuum waves into a vector sinusoidal form, which feeds energy to the electron, propelling it in its orbit (a sinusoidal waveform being a circular function, after all) and preventing it from spiraling in to the oppositely charged protons in the nucleus). Draw too much, though, and the magnetic material won't be magnetically hard enough to resist unpinning and flipping some domains to balance the energy of the two flows of virtual photons of opposite helicity (which is what gives us the poles). Draw way too much, and you'll get electron capture decay of the atoms of the magnetic material (so ¹⁴²Nd would electron-capture decay to ¹⁴²Pm, which would beta-decay (with a ¹/₂ life of 40.5 seconds) right back to ¹⁴²Nd. The newly-transmuted ¹⁴²Nd would have a random magnetic orientation, causing loss of magnetic strength of the magnet).

Hi Russ,

Would you  do  the  following  measure:

-->  The  Big Coil alone,  away  from  any magnet  flux.
-->  Charge the coil  with  a battery
-->  note the time constant θ = L/R  for  different  value  of V = 1,2,3...n batteries
-->  also  note  the  charge  amp
-->  verify on oscilloscope if  the  MMC (magneto motive charge) of the  coil charge  is attained @ 5*θ
-->  search for a law f(n,θ) where n= number of battery for charging coil and θ

WDYT ?

Quote

https://learn.sparkfun.com/tutorials/measuring-internal-resistance-of-batteries

I've got it!!!! We can all become lemon farmers and just make tons of lemon batteries and hook them all up to each other... :rofl:   We can run everything using fruit batteries!   j/k

for some upcoming tests. https://youtu.be/RxN1dtmxJcs

   @Piero at one point i did that already.
however i can do it again when I take the magnet out.

~Russ

Quote from ~Russ on March 26th, 2018, 01:54 PM

for some upcoming tests. https://youtu.be/RxN1dtmxJcs

~Russ

That's crazy! :-)

Quote from minoly on March 26th, 2018, 02:14 PM

That's crazy! :-)

hehe, that was 670 RPM or so...

testing a few other ideas... ~Russ

Infact...  This was with only 2 ends of the coils conected... 

Whoa... so wait how many volts are going into it?

I know there's less than 888 9 volt batteries there though lmao.

What you saw in that video was just the magnet spinning... ~Russ